Mr. Rublee to Mr. Fish.
Sir: The summer session of the Federal Assembly of Switzerland closed on Saturday the 22d instant. After considerable discussion, and several disagreeing votes, the two houses finally coincided in postponing the consideration of the report on the proposed revision of the federal constitution to a special session, which will be convened for the purpose on the 6th day of November next.
The summer session was mainly devoted to the consideration of measures of a purely local interest.
Recent events in Europe have caused increased attention to be given to the promotion of the efficiency of the army, and credits to the amount of seven and a half millions of francs were voted for the purpose of improving the arms now on hand, for the manufacture of additional supplies, and for the new arming of the Landwehr with repeater-guns.
By the same post with this dispatch, I forward printed copies, in duplicate, of a message of the Federal Council to the Federal Assembly concerning the new armament of the Landwehr and the creation of a reserve of guns, and a message of the Federal Council to the Federal Assembly concerning the transformation of the cannon of the light artillery into rifled breech-loading guns and the increase of field batteries. These documents contain some interesting details respecting the armament of Swiss forces, and recent improvements in artillery and firearms.
A discussion of some importance occurred in the council of states, on the day preceding the final adjournment, upon a motion by Mr. Carl Vogt inviting the Federal Council to take the initiative in calling an international conference for the purpose of establishing definitive rules in regard to the rights and duties of neutrals. The author of the motion remarked that at present the same rules did not apply alike to different powers. There was one law for the weak and another for the strong. In illustration of this assertion, he averred that during the recent war between France and Germany, the United States and England had permitted an extensive traffic in arms and munitions of war, while Switzerland and Belgium felt constrained to prohibit such exportations. The internement of the Flench Army of the East had imposed heavy sacrifices; a powerful state, he said, would have disarmed the forces and sent them back into their own country. The Geneva convention for the aid of the sick and wounded, in time of war, established certain rules respecting neutrals; why not, in like manner, establish a code for the conduct of neutrals in other respects? Referring to the recent treaty between the United States and Great Britain, the speaker said it proposed to settle the Alabama question by agreeing upon certain principles [Page 883] of international law as binding upon neutrals, and was a step in the same direction with the measure which he proposed.
The President of the confederation, Dr. Schenk, in reply, opposed the motion chiefly as impracticable and likely to lead to no result. Conceding, however, that the several powers gave their consent, and a conference was held, there would exist such a diversity of views and interests that it was hardly possible that they could be reconciled. He also referred to the difficulty of enforcing an international code, and the probability that it would be disregarded, at their convenience, by the great powers, if once adopted. He accordingly regarded the advantages that might be anticipated from such a conference as illusory.
After considerable discussion pro and con, the motion was modified so as merely to invite the Federal Council to inquire whether it may not be possible by international action to define and establish the rights and duties of neutrals, and to prepare a report upon the subject. In this form the motion was adopted by a large majority.
I have, &c.,